When our friends at Ride BMX released word about the new NORA CUP for “web video part”, it sparked a discussion within the OTX office regarding the difference between web “videos”, web “edits”, web “video parts”, promos, what should be considered what and if there’s even a difference at all. I’ve seen lots of opinions regarding BMX on the web over the years, so I figured this would be a fun topic to delve into.

With that said, I hit up a handful of riders, videographers and industry folk to ask them the following:

In your opinion…

Is there a difference between a “web video” and a “web edit”? If so, describe how the terminology differs?

Should something labeled “web video part” be part of a full video, or can it be a standalone thing?

If a rider releases a new solo 2 minute (or so) collection of kick ass footage online, you would classify this as a…?

If someone releases a “one night at House park with the homies” thing, you would classify this as a…?

If a full length video that’s been in the works for 2 years, has proper art direction and production value is released FREE online, is it considered a “web video” or just a “video”? What would you describe Fiend’s “FIENDING” as?

Does a projects method of distribution (physical DVD or online) affect your opinion?

Can product promos that feature great riding mixed with product info and images also be considered web edit/video/parts? Or are they just “promos”?

Is there a difference between a “web video” and a “web edit”? If so, describe how the terminology differs?

I think for me different things come to mind when I hear those terms. “Edit” always makes me think of dudes chilling at the park or something that didn’t take up a whole lot of time or effort. I wouldn’t want to use the word edit to describe a BSD Trip video or a Dakota web video, just feels like I’m devaluing it somehow.

Should something labeled “web video part” be part of a full video, or can it be a standalone thing?

I think it can be a stand alone thing these days. There are dudes that have put in serious work to make memorable web videos, as much work that you would envision them putting into a dvd project. We’ve tried to do that with Kink over the course of 2014. Aaron Smith, Dan Coller, Jake Petruchik, Chad Osburn, myself, Tony, Sexton. Something that you really worked on, something representative of your best riding at the moment, that’s a video part in my opinion.

If a rider releases a new solo 2 minute (or so) collection of kick ass footage online, you would classify this as a…?

Yeah, I’d say that’s qualifies as a video part. If the dude is putting in work and it’s solid all the way through. Doesn’t have to be 5 minutes and two songs to make it a part in my eyes.

If someone releases a “one night at House park with the homies” thing, you would classify this as a…?

Yeah, like I mentioned before, that’s what I would call an edit. Took two hours to film and even less to cut together. Ideally, this is the type of video the internet was invented for, haha.

If a full length video that’s been in the works for 2 years, has proper art direction and production value is released FREE online, is it considered a “web video” or just a “video”?

That’s a video. Just because someone is offering something for free, doesn’t mean that the work that the riders and producers put in is less valuable. Companies have to be more creative now with how they release large scale video content these days, and at the end of the day 100% of video content that a brand releases is for promotional purposes. Even if you spent $20,000 filming for that free video, it has a chance at being the best piece of advertisement/promotion you could hope for.

What would you describe Fiend’s “FIENDING” as?

A free gift to BMX? Haha, I mean I would describe it as a web video I guess, even though it seems like so much more than that. Something that you have bookmarked and want to watch for a long time. This doesn’t belong in the same category as the latest “Homies at MLK Park Edit”

Does a projects method of distribution (physical DVD or online) affect your opinion?

Yeah, I don’t think I’ll ever get tired of owning DVD’s. At this point it’s probably just showing my age but when someone is offering a full length DVD, in my head I’m like “Oh shit, these dudes put it down, this is special”. Web content is an absolute necessity if you want your brand to survive these days, there’s no question. But the DVD thing will always catch my attention.

Can product promos that feature great riding mixed with product info and images also be considered web edit/video/parts? Or are they just “promos”?

Yeah I think it depends on how it’s made. Honestly, the product promo videos are the thing I struggle with the most as a video guy. It’s hard to call a product promo a video part when I’m looking at motion graphics in between every clip. I’ve been guilty of this too, it’s hard to find a balance on that stuff. If a guy really put in work for something like this, I think the riding should mostly speak for the products, that’s why you have the team in the first place.

Thanks! Anything you would like to add to this discussion?
Nope.

brandon means pic

WILL STROUD

Is there a difference between a “web video” and a “web edit”? If so, describe how the terminology differs?

In my opinion they mean the same thing.

Should something labeled “web video part” be part of a full video, or can it be a standalone thing?

It hard to define what’s worthy of being called a “video part” but I think in the future when DVDs/hard copies phase out we will drop referencing “web” as all content will live online. I think brands and blogs should make it clear when posting video parts that are from full length DVDs but it’s fair to say if someone puts in work to make a video part that’s released exclusively online it’s still a video part.

If a rider releases a new solo 2 minute (or so) collection of kick ass footage online, you would classify this as a…?

I think that’s up the the rider and filmer to decide if they want to call it a “video part” or just a “web video”. “Video part” definitely holds a lot more prestige and will be scrutinized more and most likely get more traffic depending on who the rider is and how good the production is. Sometimes riders just want to go make a fun edit where they travel around and film clips that they are stoked on but didn’t necessarily “go in” or try to kill themselves doing bangers.

If someone releases a “one night at House park with the homies” thing, you would classify this as a…?

I think this should be classified as a “web video”. Until the past few years most online BMX videos were just scraps or leftover clips that people didn’t want to save for their DVD parts and now that’s obviously changing and people are putting banging video parts online since it reaches a wider audience.

If a full length video that’s been in the works for 2 years, has proper art direction and production value is released FREE online, is it considered a “web video” or just a “video”?

I think this should be referenced as a “full length video” since that’s exactly what it is, whether it’s released on YouTube exclusively and/or DVD it’s still a full length video. Of course it’s up to the brand producing the video to call it whatever they want but I don’t think “full length” videos with proper production and art direction shouldn’t be downplayed as “web videos”.

What would you describe Fiend’s “FIENDING” as?

FIENDING is a goddamn gift to the internet from Garrett Reynolds and crew. Nuff said…

Does a projects method of distribution (physical DVD or online) affect your opinion?

No because like I mentioned before in the future there will be less DVDs. There will always be some DVDs just like there will always be vinyl but I think in the not so distant future when all content lives online, we will specify if the video was a hard copy (DVD/Bluray/etc.) and the term “web” in “web video” will be dropped. So all videos that live online will just be called videos since we won’t need to reference “web” for all videos that live only in cyberspace. DVDs are really important to my generation of riders but I see younger kids in future generations caring less about having hard copies on their shelves. A really successful BMX DVD might sell 5,000 – 10,000 copies in 2014 but FIENDING has gotten 230k views since it dropped about 2 months ago… DVDs will always be around for the collectors but I just think a lot less brands will produce hard copies in the years to come.

Can product promos that feature great riding mixed with product info and images also be considered web edit/video/parts? Or are they just “promos”?

I think if there are products in videos they should be called “promos”. But essentially all videos that brands release online are promotional/marketing content to attempt to sell more product, so you could argue that any video a brand puts out is a promo. I think it’s fair to call FIENDING a promo and that has a little more prestige than “web video”.

Thanks! Anything you would like to add to this discussion?

I think that’s about it. Definitely excited to see what other people’s views are on this!

JAKE SEELEY

Is there a difference between a “web video” and a “web edit”? If so, describe how the terminology differs?

I’d say there most definitely is a difference. When I think of web video I think of something that’s longer then 10 minutes long that you can go home to and watch on your Apple TV with a couple friends. For a web edit I just think of a single part and mix that’s about 1-3 minutes long that.

Should something labeled “web video part” be part of a full video, or can it be a standalone thing?

I think it should be it’s own thing and called a web edit unless it was a part in a web video to begin. If that’s the case then it’s ok to call it a “web video part”.

If a rider releases a new solo 2 minute (or so) collection of kick ass footage online, you would classify this as a…?

Like I described in the previous question I’d put this under the “web edit” category. There nothing “video” about a 2 minute watch. ha.

If someone releases a “one night at House park with the homies” thing, you would classify this as a…?

Really depends on how it’s put together but I’d say it falls into the “web edit” category because it’s put together quickly and done quickly in just a one night. I feel like for it to be a “web video” it needs to have time put into it and be put together with sections and multiple songs like a DVD copy video would be presented.

If a full length video that’s been in the works for 2 years, has proper art direction and production value is released FREE online, is it considered a “web video” or just a “video”?

That’s a tough one but I feel if the video is premiered online first it’s always gonna be labeled as a web video. For it to be a labeled as a video it’s got to be premiered and sold on DVD first. So in my opinion it really comes down to how it was first premiered.

What would you describe Fiend’s “FIENDING” as?

I’d describe that as a “Web Video” it’s has all the essentials of a full length DVD video but it was premiered online only which makes it a “web video”.

Does a projects method of distribution (physical DVD or online) affect your opinion?

Yea it definitely does, I feel if there’s physical copies put out there and not premiered online it gonna be taken a lot more seriously.

Can product promos that feature great riding mixed with product info and images also be considered web edit/video/parts? Or are they just “promos”?

If there’s riding in it I feel it should fall into the “web edit category.

Thanks! Anything you would like to add to this discussion?

Bring back full length DVDs!

DAKOTA ROCHE

Is there a difference between a “web video” and a “web edit”? If so, describe how the terminology differs?

When I think of a “web edit”, I envision something like “an hour at the skate plaza with bob”… Something that’s just kind of thrown together, not a tremendous amount of thought, direction and effort put into it. Where as a “web video” or “web part” is something that you would work hard on, spend a good amount of time filming and really try to create something you and all people involved are proud of.

Should something labeled “web video part” be part of a full video, or can it be a standalone thing?

It could stand alone in my opinion. In fact, I feel it gives it the proper credit, like this ain’t leftover footage, this is a video part I worked hard on. Whether it’s on a DVD with other peoples parts or released on the web by itself shouldn’t change a thing. It just needs to be presented correctly.

If a rider releases a new solo 2 minute (or so) collection of kick ass footage online, you would classify this as a…?

Web part or video part

If someone releases a “one night at House park with the homies” thing, you would classify this as a…?

Web edit

If a full length video that’s been in the works for 2 years, has proper art direction and production value is released FREE online, is it considered a “web video” or just a “video”?

That’s a “video” that just happens to be released on the web. I suppose “web video” works too but I hate when things don’t sound like they’re getting the proper credit. I think in general it’s an interesting era for videos, we’re all over the place with this shit right now haha.

What would you describe Fiend’s “FIENDING” as?

That’s an incredible full team video that we somehow got blessed with for free via the web.

Does a projects method of distribution (physical DVD or online) affect your opinion?

This day and age, not nearly as much as it used to. Look at “Fiending” for instance. Whether that was on a DVD or web-released is kind of irrelevant as far as how top-notch it was. I’m way more open minded when it comes to web related videos and projects now, DVDs are rad, but we gotta stick with the times.

Can product promos that feature great riding mixed with product info and images also be considered web edit/video/parts? Or are they just “promos”?

It really depends, but I think it could still be considered a part or a video. You’re still working hard for it, just so happens it’s promoting some sort product as well. It’d be like a “shoe part” or “frame part” ect… Kind of a grey area I guess.

Thanks! Anything you would like to add to this discussion?

Nope! All good.

FRANCIS CASTRO / COMMON CREW

Is there a difference between a “web video” and a “web edit”? If so, describe how the terminology differs?

In my opinion, not much, they are both initially designed to make their first and final stop on the internet, that is where they were designed to go, and that is where they most likely will stay. The only difference I believe is that when I think of web video, sections, parts, and line ups pop into my mind.

Should something labeled “web video part” be part of a full video, or can it be a standalone thing?

When I hear that someone says video “part” it usually means it is just that… a “part” to something bigger/longer. That being said, yes I do believe that a “web video part” means it is a part of a FULL web video, an edit within a bigger edit if you will. However, I feel like parts can be standalone things if they are re-uploaded individually for whatever reason. The initial goal of the part’s footage was to contribute to a web video containing a line up of riders, giving it the title of “part” in the first place and allowing it to keep that title even if later posted individually separated from the other sections.

If a rider releases a new solo 2 minute (or so) collection of kick ass footage online, you would classify this as a…?

A kick ass web edit.

If someone releases a “one night at House park with the homies” thing, you would classify this as a…?

Sounds to me like it is still edited content designed to be posted solely on the web, classifying it in my book as a “web edit”. haha

If a full length video that’s been in the works for 2 years, has proper art direction and production value is released FREE online, is it considered a “web video” or just a “video”?

It’s considered a web video but also a fucking blessing. With so much content flooding and… I’ll even go as far to say as “spamming” the internet it is awesome to see the occasional, company/crew/etc go above and beyond to stand out and rise above an easily forgettable content overloaded internet sea. Even tho the title remains the same, I feel like those occasional videos that take the content, editing, and art direction that much more seriously will always have a higher sense of respect and remembrance from me and many others.

What would you describe Fiend’s “FIENDING” as?

“FIENDING” was a prime example of a web video blessing and personally serves as the ultimate inspiration to me and all my friends. I believe that it also has a huge lesson behind it, its simple, go out, do dope shit, film it, and make sure to surround yourself around those who will work as hard as you for a project and make it fucking happen. In addition I feel like a lot of companies need to follow their foot steps and take production and art value more seriously, not to mention looking for more than just skill level when considering team expansion. Knowing how to do every trick is cool and everything but developing your pro team in a way like Fiend where everyone is cool and comfortable with each other is just as crucial. Take the companies with a homie vibe like Kink, BSD, Cult, Stranger, of course Fiend, and many more for example… I feel like they have so much more to offer a video and their audiences rather than just a bunch of bland randoms on a trip together. Fiend is doing right, especially with Tony behind the lens and computer!

Does a projects method of distribution (physical DVD or online) affect your opinion?

Not much, a good promo with a sick vibe to get my blood flowing is all it takes and chances are I will purchase whatever just got put in front of me.

Can product promos that feature great riding mixed with product info and images also be considered web edit/video/parts? Or are they just “promos”?

When I think of them, they stand out as just promos for sure. Like I said earlier I feel like the title of part/promo/edit has a lot to do with its initial purpose, and if that is to promote a product then given the options, promo seems to be a good fit. You simply can’t put a banger filled web video on the same scale as something designed to geometrically break down specs.

Thanks! Anything you would like to add to this discussion?

I’m good!

pulled from @charliecrum Instagram

CHARLIE CRUMLISH

Is there a difference between a “web video” and a “web edit”? If so, describe how the terminology differs?

To this point I hadn’t seen a difference but maybe we can establish what’s what right now. Organization is the one thing we are lacking right now, it isn’t content. Everyone is putting out crazy ass content. Just need some direction. Good on you Defgrip.

Should something labeled “web video part” be part of a full video, or can it be a standalone thing?

Can totally be a standalone thing. Can be anything you want. Could be a cooking show with some riding and 20,000 kids would still watch it.

If a rider releases a new solo 2 minute (or so) collection of kick ass footage online, you would classify this as a…?

Definitely falls under “video part” to me, but will most likely be posted, described, and shared as a web video. Even though they pop up with greater frequency now, you can still put just as much effort into it as a DVD section. Maybe the timeframe was 2 months, maybe it was 2 years, but if the rider is going hard and thought about every clip, that is crafting a video part.

If someone releases a “one night at House park with the homies” thing, you would classify this as a…?

I tend to file that under “do not click” or “keep scrolling quickly”. Could also fall under a filmer having to pay his bills or buy some weed. I ain’t mad. Some people are.

If a full length video that’s been in the works for 2 years, has proper art direction and production value is released FREE online, is it considered a “web video” or just a “video”?

Web video to me denotes quick. Spending 2 years on something is what’s important, not how it was released.

What would you describe Fiend’s “FIENDING” as?

The most progressive street riding captured in HD and uploaded to Vimeo so far…

Does a projects method of distribution (physical DVD or online) affect your opinion?

Only if they refuse to put it online at all. I can totally appreciate keeping it exclusive for a bit, but there’s so many young kids out there who want to see good riding but can’t buy DVD’s in their country, or can’t afford them if they are available.

Back when I started putting out DVD’s I did it to get more eyes on the videos my friends and I were making. Nowadays the vast majority of the attention comes from online so not embracing that is crazy. People get too attached to how things were sometimes, more often than not it gets manifested as a negative comment about how too many web videos are coming out nowadays. These are the same people who don’t say thanks when they got to watch it for free.

Can product promos that feature great riding mixed with product info and images also be considered web edit/video/parts? Or are they just “promos”?

Parts and frame “promos” can fall into two categories to me: informational, or riding intensive.

Half the time, it’s mostly a rider describing their thought process behind the design along with some b-roll, skatepark footage, street scraps, footage they had chillin. Maybe they shot it in a few weeks. A month or two. That’s fine. There’s a lot of kids out there who want to hear about it. I think these should be called product features. The focus is on the product.

Then the riding ones. I respect the hell out of a rider like Nathan Williams who takes it on himself to film a new video part when a company gives him the honor of a signature product. These riders go and film for six months to year or more and save the best footage to make a truly special video section. The product is in the back of your mind as you watch what you came to the BMX website to see. Probably the most effective thing you can do with your footage as a rider because these views literally do equal royalties in the long run.

My two cents is that I truly feel as though people turn your video off when you start talking about products when they expected to see riding. The descriptive interview/ talking thing is cool but don’t waste your best footage in that kind of video. Make sure they know what they are getting into. Like this shit ain’t a bar promo, hit play kid, c’mon…

Thanks! Anything you would like to add to this discussion?

Just want to show love for the new environment in which we have to display our artwork and our videos as BMXers. A global platform of people watching our street riding. Very excited to see what we can do with this.

pulled from @yo_navaz instagram. @markgralla pic

RYAN NAVAZIO

Is there a difference between a “web video” and a “web edit”? If so, describe how the terminology differs?

Seems like the two terms are interchagable for most people these days. But I guess a “web edit” can be anything from a skatepark session filmed in an hour to a video that took serious time and effort. I’d call something a web edit if it was done with minimal effort and a web video (web video part?) something that took time and planning.

Should something labeled “web video part” be part of a full video, or can it be a standalone thing?

I guess it can be both.

If a rider releases a new solo 2 minute (or so) collection of kick ass footage online, you would classify this as a…?

Nowadays that’s a video part. Not necessarily what I would like to think a video part should be in the traditional sense. But if you’re a pro rider and that’s how you’re releasing videos it’s basically your video part.

If someone releases a “one night at House park with the homies” thing, you would classify this as a…?

Web edit – just cause I’m not sure what else to classify it as.

If a full length video that’s been in the works for 2 years, has proper art direction and production value is released FREE online, is it considered a “web video” or just a “video”?

Just a video I guess. The whole thing is confusing anyway.

What would you describe Fiend’s “FIENDING” as?

One of the most progressive bmx videos of all time that also happened to be a web promo.

Does a projects method of distribution (physical DVD or online) affect your opinion?

Not anymore. Although I’m kind of shocked companies are still going the DVD route. I’m not against it, but it definitely doesn’t seem as logical these days. I would like to see more stuff on iTunes, but that’s another topic.

Can product promos that feature great riding mixed with product info and images also be considered web edit/video/parts? Or are they just “promos”?

Promos. If you’re a pro rider and your video part has shots of products I’m probably not going to vote for it. But if it’s done correctly and I wanna watch it over and over then who knows.

Thanks! Anything you would like to add to this discussion?

All of this terminology is pretty confusing. A good video is a good video but what you choose to call it will definitely affect people’s perceptions of it.

pulled from @mikemastroni Instagram

MIKE MASTRONI

Is there a difference between a “web video” and a “web edit”? If so, describe how the terminology differs?

I think just in general if something has any legit amount of production value I consciously refer to it as a “video” because using the word “edit” for anything that took work/creativity cheapens it a ton and just makes it sound like a disposable thing. An edit in my mind is just some clips you filmed at the park or whatever with no real thought involved.

Should something labeled “web video part” be part of a full video, or can it be a standalone thing?

If something is labeled “web video part” that should absolutely never fly for a section that is part of a bigger project. Say if someone’s section from a DVD or an ongoing web project is released online…that better be labeled accordingly to what DVD or project it’s a part of, not just purely as “Rider Name: Web Video Part.” Something like that I feel like almost has to be a stand-alone thing from a company, or as as rider releasing a section on their own.

If a rider releases a new solo 2 minute (or so) collection of kick ass footage online, you would classify this as a…?

If it’s like awesome riding, awesome spots, awesome filming and/or has some degree of production value…that’s a “video” or “part.” If it’s all whatever and it’s at the skatepark that’s definitely an “edit.”

If someone releases a “one night at House park with the homies” thing, you would classify this as a…?

That is the definition of an “edit.”

If a full length video that’s been in the works for 2 years, has proper art direction and production value is released FREE online, is it considered a “web video” or just a “video”?

That is a legit video project 100%. The medium in which something is released shouldn’t effect it’s title.

What would you describe Fiend’s “FIENDING” as?

Video project and/or company promo.

Does a projects method of distribution (physical DVD or online) affect your opinion?

Well if there are no physical copies of something it’s certainly not a “DVD”… but again that’s just a medium people put “video projects” on. That’s actually interesting because it absolutely shouldn’t effect my opinion at all…like if something’s good it’s good…but the idea of having a physical copy of something to me makes it more valuable & real. I guess you can watch anything on your TV now from your phone and shit, but you will never be able to hold a “web video” in your hand.

Can product promos that feature great riding mixed with product info and images also be considered web edit/video/parts? Or are they just “promos”?

Both are accurate I think. It really just depends on what it is.

Thanks! Anything you would like to add to this discussion?

I personally feel like BMX has this entire problem because there’s absolutely no filter on what content is deserving to be front and center on “professional” BMX websites and what isn’t. These days every kid with a video camera and a crash clip can somehow sit right there on the front page of every single reputable BMX media outlet next to legit professional riders/videographers who have worked hard to get where they are at. It’s seriously bullshit and everyone working in BMX knows it. With that being said, I believe EVERYTHING that’s good no matter where it comes from does in fact need to be front and center, but 90% of content these days is just more more more disposable crap with the purpose of “getting it out there” and less less less time and attention to making things better. I think people are starting to realize this, but at the same time I haven’t seen any reputable outlets raise the bar yet.

MARK BURNETT

Is there a difference between a “web video” and a “web edit”? If so, describe how the terminology differs?

I don’t think there’s much of a difference between a web video and a web edit. I only think there’s a difference between a web edit/video and a web part.

Should something labeled “web video part” be part of a full video, or can it be a standalone thing?

A web video part is a full part specifically filmed for the web. It’s a standalone thing that is specifically for the web. A video part that ends up on the web is what should be/is part of a full video.

If a rider releases a new solo 2 minute (or so) collection of kick ass footage online, you would classify this as a…?

I don’t think the length really matters if it’s the best riding that person can do. Most parts are longer but that all depends on the amount of time they had to film it, so a 2 minute video of the best riding that person can do would be a web part I guess.

If someone releases a “one night at House park with the homies” thing, you would classify this as a…?

A day edit, or a skatepark edit. Something like that. Most one night skatepark videos are just something to put out for the fun of making videos.

If a full length video that’s been in the works for 2 years, has proper art direction and production value is released FREE online, is it considered a “web video” or just a “video”?

That’s just generosity. It’s definitely still a video in my eyes. United’s video “Downtime” is one that comes to mind. That video is seriously so good, and they released that for free online. I know that it’s just a team video with no real sections or whatever, but I still watch that video all the time.

What would you describe Fiend’s “FIENDING” as?

The most fucked up thing ever. Fiend/Deadline is on a whole different level. Oh and that’s full web parts, to answer the actual question haha.

Does a projects method of distribution (physical DVD or online) affect your opinion?

Not really, except that I like the fact that I can watch a DVD on the really big TV’s at my friends house’s. I need to get Apple TV or something.

Can product promos that feature great riding mixed with product info and images also be considered web edit/video/parts? Or are they just “promos”?

It depends, some of them are edited with a lot of product info, which feel a lot more like “promos” than the ones that are just really good web videos with a little info at the end or whatever. I guess those are more depending on the way the video is edited.

Thanks! Anything you would like to add to this discussion?

Not really, thanks!

RYAN FUDGER

Is there a difference between a “web video” and a “web edit”? If so, describe how the terminology differs?

Nope. Interchangeable. Some people obviously use web edit for a person and web video for everything else, but I generally think the average person uses both.

Should something labeled “web video part” be part of a full video, or can it be a standalone thing?

I don’t think “web video part” is a common term, but when we decided to add a web video award to NORA this year, we had to distinguish that we wanted the cup to go to a rider and not a mix edit, a brand’s team, road trip, etc. But to answer the question, a “web video part” can be either a standalone part or portion of a larger web video, yes.

If a rider releases a new solo 2 minute (or so) collection of kick ass footage online, you would classify this as a…?

A web video, web edit, or web video part…however it tickles ya.

If someone releases a “one night at House park with the homies” thing, you would classify this as a…?

I see where you’re going with this, hah. I’d consider this a web video or web edit. If a rider shares a section on a DVD, we take the time to denote that it’s a mix or a split part. Web videos were born as mixes or travel pieces or whatever and riders taking the time they do now is the new thing. So, I think it’s worth denoting the fact that someone has taken the time and effort to consider it a web video part.

If a full length video that’s been in the works for 2 years, has proper art direction and production value is released FREE online, is it considered a “web video” or just a “video”?

Tough one. I wanna say it’s a video, but have we really reached that point yet? I’ll continue my response in the next question…

What would you describe Fiend’s “FIENDING” as?

I think the Fiend guys would consider Fiending a web video. Those are essentially the same guys that just put five years into Deadline and were on that typical “let’s do something more chill” aftermath. Somehow that produced one of the best web videos there’s ever been, but even then, it’s a far cry from Deadline. So, I’d go with web video. This is essentially the main reason why we added “#1 Web Video Part”…it gives us time to honor the riders that are currently putting out wild sections and when it finally gets to the point where enough brands are putting the same effort into “web videos” that they do DVDs, we can add a “#1 Web Video” category to NORA. I don’t know how long that’ll take, of course.

Does a project’s method of distribution (physical DVD or online) affect your opinion?

As far as NORA goes, yeah, that’s basically the root of everything.

Can product promos that feature great riding mixed with product info and images also be considered web edit/video/parts? Or are they just “promos”?

That’s for other people to decide. As with other NORA categories (besides #1 Video), we won’t have a list of “qualifying” web video parts. It’s simply up to the voter to think of the #1 Web Video Part that came out since NORA last year. If they decide to vote for a rider’s welcome edit or fork promo, then so be it.

Thanks! Anything you would like to add to this discussion?

Screw Nuno! (editor’s note – F U Fudger.)

pulled from @tymoe instagram

TY MORROWIs there a difference between a “web video” and a “web edit”? If so, describe how the terminology differs?

Well in my eyes a web video would be a semi-full length video broadcasted mainly via the internet. A web edit is perhaps something like the homies at the skatepark or doing something not as serious as a full-length street part.

Should something labeled “web video part” be part of a full video, or can it be a standalone thing?

I feel like this one was stolen from skateboarding. The skate industry is a lot more saturated and although you would think it’d be the contrary, it seems as though several pros have periods of time that they simply don’t have a DVD part to film for. They don’t want to go film at the park or abide to any of the other random categories of web videos, so they film a heavy part just like they would normally be doing if filming for a DVD.

If a rider releases a new solo 2 minute (or so) collection of kick ass footage online, you would classify this as a…?

2 minutes is a little short for a “full-length part”, so I’d categorize that one in the “web edit” section.

If someone releases a “one night at House park with the homies” thing, you would classify this as a…?

Web Edit.

If a full length video that’s been in the works for 2 years, has proper art direction and production value is released FREE online, is it considered a “web video” or just a “video”?

Kinda hard to say on this one.. I’d leave that up to part and overall video length.

What would you describe Fiend’s “FIENDING” as?

I want to call it an actual video since I’m in it, but unfortunately I’m going to have to call this a “web video”. We filmed for about 8-10 months total and knew the whole time this wasn’t going to be a release like Deadline.. Deadline was about keeping the DVD alive and doing something with a tight-knit crew. Fiending is similar to that, but had the intent of being used as a marketing tool to promote Fiend and the riders involved.

Does a projects method of distribution (physical DVD or online) affect your opinion?

As stated above, yes..

Can product promos that feature great riding mixed with product info and images also be considered web edit/video/parts? Or are they just “promos”?

I’d say call it an edit or promo.. The choice is yours! Apparently none of this terminology is exact so let’s just figure it out as we go haha!

I would of liked to hear from Dan Foley, and I’m on the same page as Ty Morrow when it comes to filming for something less than a year and it’s then put online it’s more of a web edit, a promo to keep you in the know. As for Mike Mastroni’s closing comments if you bookmark your favourite companies sites Demolition,Volume,WTP ect. to coincide with your Vimeo and YT followings you will always get the content you’d expect. I jump around the web for the stuff I want to see and the sites that he’s thinking of are for people who just want to follow bmx and need videos thrown at them.